    Look out for signs the interpreter does not know the words being used. Is the interpreter pausing a long time to translate one way or the other? Is the interpreter asking the suspect for clarification of what he is saying? What are the reactions of the suspect to the interpreting?  First person interpretation An interpreter interpreting faithfully will use the form of speech adopted by the speaker. It follows that the interpreter should, in a police interview, respond in the first person, so ‘I have never seen this person before’, not ‘s/he says that he has never seen this person before’.  Point out to police, and ensure a note is taken, if the interpreter is using the third person instead of the first.  The interpreter ‘advising’ the client Practitioners occasionally report that interpreters converse with clients during interviews, both to clarify their statements but also to advise them on what to say. Clearly, if this is happening, it raises an issue as to whether the information being recorded is truly the suspect’s own.  Ask the interpreter to clarify conversations going on with the client.  Take a note. c. Complaining about interpretation quality If, for whatever reason, you are not satisfied that the interpreter is succeeding in delivering interpretation of a sufficient quality, you need to complain about the poor quality. Remember that Article 2(5) establishes that suspects need the ‘possibility to complain’ regarding quality. i. During the interview You will need to have identified beforehand whether there is any legal regime established to allow a complaint to be made during the course of police investigations. However, you should if recourse is available, complain directly to the questioning officer carrying or a higher authority. So:      ii. Take action Inform the questioning officer of your concerns regarding interpretation. Ask for the interpreter to be replaced. Ensure a note of the complaint is retained. Ask for the interview to be started from the beginning again with a new interpreter, with the previous interview disregarded. After the interview: You need to ‘complain’ to the competent authority designated for the purpose in your national laws. It is not necessarily the case that this is the criminal court itself. However, it is important to exercise such avenues as are available to you. This may ensure that a better service is provided at subsequent questioning, if there is any. In addition, the failure to raise a complaint at this point could foreclose the possibility to raise arguments later, i.e. when asking a court to disregard / annul the questioning. 29